Benefit & Subsidy Eligibility Proof
Residents and businesses prove only "meets the eligibility criteria" — without disclosing income tier or attributes. The granting body and auditors verify conformance while holding no unnecessary personal data.
Who this is for.
For those verifying eligibility for subsidies, benefits, and public services. Collecting raw income/household/attribute data to check eligibility becomes a storage-and-leakage liability in itself. "Declared" and "verifiably eligible" are not the same.
-
Public-sector teams handling benefit/subsidy eligibility checks
-
Teams troubled by application-processing load and the leakage surface of held personal data
-
Organizations wanting fair, consistent review that survives staff turnover
Hand over the source, or just the facts?
Change what reaches the AI, and the leakage risk goes with it.
- applicant_id:
- 1234-5678
- name:
- Taro Yamada
- income:
- 3,500,000 JPY
- household:
- 4 people
- asset:
- 12,000,000 JPY
- benefit_program:
- child allowance
- holder:
- did:lemma:applicant-1234
- issuer:
- did:lemma:authority-jp-municipal
- jurisdiction:
- JP
- licenseType:
- benefit-eligibility
- disclosed:
- [isEligible, programType]
- hidden:
- [income, household_detail, asset, name]
- attestation:
- child-allowance eligibility = met
- ZK verified:
- ✓ VALID
Present only a proof that an applicant "meets the eligibility criteria" (income tier, residency, target category). Raw income amounts and household data are not disclosed. The granting body verifies conformance without storing the contents, and auditors confirm the same proof independently.
It arrives not as "more IT" but as the benefit of reducing dependence on individuals and privacy exposure.
Choose on three criteria.
Only work that needs all three at once — pass without exposing, independent verification, tamper-proof — is Lemma's domain.
| Method | Pass without exposing | Independent verification | Tamper-proof |
|---|---|---|---|
| Access control only | △ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Masking / anonymization | △ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Encryption only | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Lemma (ZK proof)the only one with all 3 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
What's next
We enter through AI-adoption and data-governance support and a PoC, and stay alongside you through to operations.
- A 30-minute review — identify eligibility checks where raw-data storage burden / leakage surface concentrates.
- Narrow to 1–2 decisions (results) to prove — e.g. "income tier ≤ requirement," "residency in target area." Not the amounts/household contents.
- Design connection and updates — connection to your application/review system, and eligibility renewal/withdrawal handling.
- Prove one path via a (quote-based) PoC.
- Hands-on support from rollout through operations — existing plan tiers (Civic / Critical / Compliance) serve only as a cost reference; the setup and pricing are designed together.
Tell us the one benefit/subsidy with the heaviest raw-data storage burden, in the first 30 minutes. No disclosure of sensitive data required.
The bigger picture
The bigger picture this use case belongs to.
We map use scenarios across industries and workflows by the four axes.
See use scenarios for Regulatory Attribute in Solutions →TRY LEMMA
Run it yourself.
No sales call needed — start hands-on with Lemma's products.